reminding DUers how unethical generative AI is, and has been since the beginning. The entire industry is built on theft of intellectual property.
A lot of the artists I know who are online, and they're all liberals, will automatically block anyone they see post AI slop, whether or not that person generated the slop themselves. They do that because even posting it shows someone who may be ethical and caring in some areas, but who has a huge blind spot, for whatever reason, when it comes to AI and the AI companies' worldwide theft of intellectual property, and all the people victimized by it.
Using generative AI (if you're not forced to), or promoting it by praising what it generates, is IMO similar to thinking it's great to buy stolen electronics for a low price.
Or - if we still had slavery now - it's similar to saying you think slavery is bad, and not owning slaves yourself, but being grateful if someone who owns slaves helps you out occasionally by having their slaves help you, or maybe invites you to a great meal at a plantation.
It's also equivalent, if you think some AI slop is funny and share it, to sharing racist or sexist jokes. Because it is offensive.
Every time you post AI slop, you're sending the message that you don't care about the theft, and you love what the AI robber barons have done with what they stole.
That's a terrible message for DU. A terrible message for anyone who wants to be considered ethical.
I think a better approach to the AI threat is to raise the alarm, and generate immediate deliberation about how society will deal with the threat. The example I posted is actually a pretty good critique of AI, based on the Citrini report about how it will destroy jobs.
Oh, that concerned you? But all the livelihoods destroyed to train the AI initially didn't?
That's sadly reminiscent of some of the more unthinking teachers I've met who worried out loud that if they or their students use AI, their work might be stolen to train the AI. They were hypocrites for worrying about that while using AI tools that worked only because of IP theft.
And I pointed out that they were.
It's unethical tech, and always will be, until the AI models trained illegally on stolen IP are destroyed, with new AI models trained only on what's in the public domain and what the AI companies have acquired legal permission to use. Those likely WON'T be as good as current illegally trained models, of course, because most of the value of generative AI is from the value of that stolen IP.
As for my "vigilance" - I'm pro-human and anti-generative AI. I'm pro-knowledge and anti-pretense and plagiarism. I'm pro-artist and creatives of all types, and anti-AI users fraudulently claiming they're somehow creative and talented because they told an AI tool to generate something for them.
I don't care how famous someone using AI is - they still make themselves look stupid and less than ethical when they post or use AI slop.
I do care about this board, and some people here either aren't aware of the terrible message they're sending when they post AI slop, or how many people considering joining DU will be turned off if AI slop is not only tolerated but praised here.
What I'm posting here doesn't have the reach it could have elsewhere. I've been able to get as many as 3/4 million views with about a thousand likes and replies on Reddit. If I get reposted by a well-known AI critic or musician elsewhere, which has happened, that post can get tens of thousands of views.
But I like this corner of the internet. I care about how it looks.
And it looks terrible when DUers give a thumbs-up to AI slop and generative AI and the robber barons behind that tech.
I can at least try to make clear to anyone reading this board and seeing AI slop posted that not all DUers support that unethical tech and the thieves behind it.
= new reply since forum marked as read